December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Which is secure
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Which is secure block cypher,or stream cypher? Thanks

2 1

Email Survey Form
by Netscape Communications 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for downloading one or more trial versions of Netscape Server applications from our Web site. We appreciate your interest in taking the time to evaluate some of our newest and most exciting products. We would like to follow-up with you to learn more about your company environment and better understand your needs. To do so, please click below or copy the URL site address listed below. http://netscape.web-register.com/cgi/netscape/form/www_form?x=141270 If you experience problems entering the site, and are prompted to enter a customer ID number; your number is 141270 - or you may call 1-888-349-3100. Netscape respects your online time and Internet privacy. If you would prefer not to receive future online surveys, please go to the site listed above and click on the box that has unsubscribe. Thank you for your time, Netscape Communications

1 0

Re: Microsoft's World Domination Failing? [Forward]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, >From somebody in the gun lobby industry who doesn't mind sharing their opinion, though not their name... Forwarded message: > My attitude about Bill Gate$ is: Screw him! Ever since he helped finance a > recent anti-gun initiative in Washington state with over $1 million of > personal cash, I've considered him an elitist jerk. He recently sent out a > chain e-mail in an attempt to collect e-mail addresses, offering $1,000 to > any users who could stack 1,000 addresses below theirs. I refused to > forward it. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | When a man assumes a public trust, he should | | consider himself public property. | | | | Thomas Jefferson | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Dealing with Spam, Part 1
by ichudov＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > At 7:12 PM -0800 2/17/98, Marek Jedlinski wrote: > >Did you read to the point in my post when I said I would happily shut up if > >there *was* technology available? I agree with your "basic philosophy", > > Suppose someone said, "I will happily shut up and stop proposing laws to > restrict online pornography if someone shows me that there is technology > available to block it."? > > How about, "I will happily shut up if there is technology to block bad > thoughts from reaching me. Otherwise, I favor censorship." To add to this, the spam blocking technology is widely available and can be used by anyone with half brain. My spam filters make me spend no more than a minute or so a day on quickly reviewing and deleting spams. I do it by saving all messages that are likely to be spam to a separate folder. A quick browse through subject lines of these messages is enough to delete them really quickly. In the future such spam detection is going to become a lot harder. Perhaps a system where the first time sender pays a refundable digital fee to the reader will become necessary. - Igor.

2 1

SAHMD / Porlo
by Linda Reed--PCC West Campus CSC 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

SAHMD / Prologue 2/0 (kinda)
by Linda Reed--PCC West Campus CSC 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[Author's Note: This chapter, or continuation of the prologue, or whatever the fuck it is, contains an expose of the true diabolical nature of Lucky Green. Unfortunately, the only existing file-copy and printout are at the residence of a friend who is not currently at home, and it seems to be in my best interest to leave town in a hurry, without turning on my headlights and using only back roads and alleys. Anyone who is just so desperate to read Prologue 2/0 that they are peeing thier pants might want to email Jay Tolkoff at whatever internet address appears on Prologue 1/0 that was recently spammed to the CypherPunks list, pleading, bribing, threatening or thanking him, in order to see if he might possibly be open to sending you (or the list) a copy of foresaid missive. At present, continuation of "Space Aliens Hide My Drugs" seems to be largely dependent upon the speed of my vehicle and the volume of my ammo supply. (The more things change, the more they remain insane.) And the good news is... As soon as I hit 'send', Baby and I will be hitting the road, under cover of darkness, with the sounds of Linda Lou and the Drifters belting out Leadbelly's "When I Was A Cowboy" in our wake. Don't get any on'ya...]

1 0

Re: I was auto-outed by an IMG tag in HTML spam
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

William H. Geiger III wrote: > >This could be a good sting opperation. Send an anonymous e-mail >message that points to a childporn site. The [add your jackbooted >thug orginization here] kick in your door as soon as they get the >signal that your machine has connected to the site and downloaded >the images. > >Hmmmm I wonder if there is a way to get the browser to DL an image >without displaying it. The pictures would be sitting in your cache >without even knowing it. Probably not a big issue I would imagine >that a jury would convict on website logs alone even if no pictures >were found on the machine. <img src="http://sting.tla.gov/randpix.cgi" width=1 height=1> would get shmeebs using netscab or microslop...

1 0

Barnes & Nobles indicted on child porno... [CNN]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > NATION'S LARGEST BOOKSELLER CHARGED WITH CHILD PORNOGRAPHY > > February 18, 1998 > Web posted at: 10:28 p.m. EST (0328 GMT) > > MONTGOMERY, Alabama (AP) -- An Alabama grand jury indicted the > nation's largest bookseller, Barnes & Noble, on child pornography > charges involving the sale of books by noted photographers whose > work includes pictures of nude children. > > State Attorney General Bill Pryor said Wednesday he started the > grand jury investigation after receiving complaints about two books > being sold at Barnes & Noble stores in Alabama: "The Age of > Innocence" by French photographer David Hamilton and "Radiant > Identities" by San Francisco photographer Jock Sturges. > > The indictment accuses the New York-based company of disseminating > "obscene material containing visual reproduction of persons under 17 > years of age involved in obscene acts." ____________________________________________________________________ | | | When a man assumes a public trust, he should | | consider himself public property. | | | | Thomas Jefferson | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

privacy trade war
by Attila T. Hun 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FUD: Forwarded at 980219:171500 +0000 by Attila T. Hun <attila(a)hun.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Europe, U.S. try to head off privacy trade war _________________________________________________________________ BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) - U.S. companies doing business in Europe are nervously counting the days to what they fear could be a new trans-Atlantic showdown. Oct. 24 is the deadline for the 15 European Union nations to implement a tough law designed to protect citizens from computer-age invasions of privacy. The law gives individuals broad rights to know, and in some cases control, how information about their buying habits, credit ratings, health, political affiliations and other characteristics is used. The problem, which has been consuming increasing amounts of attention in Brussels and Washington, is that it also allows governments to block exports of personal information to third countries that do not provide "adequate" protection. The United States is scrambling to show that it does not fall into that category even though it prefers industry self-regulation to strict government controls. "It's clear that the EU has a law with a sort of centralized government-led approach that they have to follow," a U.S. official said. "We don't have such an approach and we're not going to be taking such an approach." Washington argues that industry codes of conduct are an effective way to guard against misuse of data -- a stance that critics say does not appreciate the historical reasons Europe wants the right to privacy enshrined in law. "The difference between the United States (and Europe) is that the smell of fascism is still thick in the air in Europe," said Simon Jones, founder of the British-based global coalition Privacy International, which supports the EU approach. The conflict has raised fears that the two sides are heading for confusion at best and a bruising trade battle at worst once the EU law takes effect. "Every time we meet this comes up because the potential risk is quite large," the U.S. official said. The EU data protection directive, adopted after much controversy in 1995, aims to protect information traveling over electronic networks including the Internet from abuse by potential "Big Brothers." It also aims to ensure that public agencies, banks, mail order firms, multinationals and others can send data across Europe without fearing it will be blocked by differences in national privacy laws. It gives individuals the right to know what data has been collected, to prevent details from being handed over to third parties such as direct marketers, to file complaints about the misuse of data with a national authority and to win compensation for damages. The sticking point for Washington is Article 25, which requires governments to bar organizations from transferring personal data to third countries that do not "ensure an adequate level of protection." Since U.S. law does not mandate the controls required by the EU directive, companies fear the country will be blacklisted. "This disruption of trade would have an enormous impact on data flows required for electronic commerce," the EU Committee of the American Chamber of Commerce, which lobbies for U.S. business on EU issues, said in a policy paper. Washington has responded to the threat by pushing its business sectors to draw up codes of conduct with teeth. It has set a July 1 deadline for assessing whether that approach will work, the American official said. Industry sources say government officials have urged them to draw up codes bolstered by consumer notices, effective enforcement and outside audits -- or face continued pressure from the EU and home-grown privacy activists. "The hope is there will be a self-regulatory solution strong enough to give the U.S. the opportunity to say, 'Look what we've done' and the Europeans to say, 'They've complied, we can back off,"' Mark Kightlinger, a lawyer at Covington & Burling in Brussels who is following the issue, said. Many U.S. companies already have privacy policies and some sectors have been forced to strengthen their protection under pressure from the Federal Trade Commission. For example, a group of leading American computer database companies that was under fire for releasing Social Security and other information drew up a privacy policy in December. The American Electronics Association says it is among industry groups that are debating how to formulate a code of conduct. The European Commission, the EU executive said, has assured the United States that it does not envisage a blanket ban on data transfers to the United States, even under the status quo. Commission President Jacques Santer said in a letter to the EU Committee that the law allowed for "ad hoc solutions" and a "case by case" approach. But he said codes of conduct alone were not enough. "There is a need for sanctions and individuals must have guaranteed access to their personal data and a means of redress if their rights are violated," he said. A working party of EU national regulators echoed that message when it issued a paper in January outlining criteria for effective self-regulation in third countries. "Self-regulation as such is not a very explicit term," a commission official said. "Does it mean self-regulation, we don't do anything? Or do we inform consumers about our privacy policies and provide a right of access and rectification?" Some say the EU-U.S. conflict highlights the need for a global approach to data privacy. Some international organizations have already taken up the question such as the 29-member Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the International Chamber of Commerce. Santer argued in his letter that the Geneva-based World Trade Organization was the appropriate forum. _________________________ NOTICE ______________________ In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. _______________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be iQBVAwUBNOxqILR8UA6T6u61AQFcdgIApku3mtLjUenuYQV9tPwev/dbZrcDEeKa Lp/tOlfU5psEeHmcTtA2ltSLwFgZX9dD//41Cll9txi7BfbDOC0YQg== =8FJW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Anthrax--The Horsemen are Riding
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN is reporting a news flash, with few details, about two men being arrested in Las Vegas for making or possessing or planning to make anthrax. Details should be emerging, but I have a hunch it's a witch hunt, an invocation of the Four Horsement, to drum up support for Clinton's Dirty Little War. Now, just what are the chances of such an arrest *exactly* as the USG is rattling sabers over Saddam's alleged anthrax and other CBW items? It seems highly likely that the word went out to local FBI offices to "beat the bushes" to produce some news headlines. "Find us some jimbells we can show to the American public as proof that an undeclared, unsupported war with Iraq is justified." Expect more raids on "terrorist cells." Expect more coincidental findings of chemicals and supplies which _could_ be used to make banned items. Expect the usual suspects, like Fineswine, to call for limits on free communications ("which are being used by terrorists") and cryptography. Meanwhile, expect no Congressional vote for Clinton's War with Saddam. Why won't Congress declare war, as is its responsibility (clearly stated in the Constitution)? The last time around, in 1990-1, there was a six-month buildup to the start of the war, there was apparently overwhelming public hatred of Saddam, there was a clear goal ("liberate Kuwait"), and there was clear support by other nations, other Arab states, the United Nations, etc. And yet the vote in Congress was very close...the Congress came very close to not issuing a statement of support. (Of course, this was still not a declaration of war, as the Constitution calls for, but it's about as close as we ever get in this post-WW II "Executive" government, where Congress never declares war, not even in Korea, Viet Nam, the Gulf, etc.) And this time around the public's interest in Saddam is ho-hum, the support of other nations is lukewarm to nonexistent, the goals of a war are completely unclear, and Congress appears unwilling to vote support. And yet the war will probably happen. Clinton, the draft dodger and antiwar activist (factual statement, not a judgement on his actions in the 60s), _needs_ a Nice Little War. But I predict it will backfire. He'll kill ten thousand Iraqi women, children, and other innocents, he'll incinerate some underground bunkers holding terrified residents of Baghdad, and he'll bomb some pesticide facilities. But in a region as vast as Iraq is, does anybody think he'll destroy all of those shock-resistant flasks and Thermos bottles carring whatever biological goodies he's already made? When Clinton's minions stood and held up bags of sugar and said "This much anthrax could kill everyone in Washington," why, after the cheering stopped, didn't the obvious question get asked: "And bombing Baghdad stops this bag of sugar from being used in just _what_ way?" If a couple of guys in Las Vegas can get busted for doing Illegal Experiments, regardless of whether actual anthrax is ever found, then why do we think Iraqi, Libyan, Sudanese, and other such nations have not long, long had the means to disperse anthrax in nations which bomb them, kill their children, and tell the U.N. to boycott them? Like I always say, avoid "soft targets." Avoid the Schelling points for attacks, the sites any self-respecting terrorist, freedom fighter, or patriot would attack first. When Washington, the president not the pesthole, advised us to "avoid foreign wars," we should have heeded him. America has become Amerika, Policeman to the World, ready to inject herself into foreign wars in Bosnia, Haiti, Ruwanda, Somalia, Viet Nam, Korea, El Salvador, Kuwait, and on and on. "Pouring out the phials" may be rough justice for Amerika. --Tim May Just Say No to "Big Brother Inside" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^3,021,377 | black markets, collapse of governments.

3 3